To Top

New York Times’ “Experts Believe Iran Conflict Is Less Likely”

Commenting on the New York Times’ (4/30/2012) “Experts Believe Iran Conflict Is Less Likely”, we should hope the newspaper is right and there will be no war, because, if it were to start, only God knows how and when it will finish.

Protests in Iran

It implies much more than nuclear Iran; it implies trying to stop energy (oil and gas) passing from Iran through Iraq and Syria (the way Russia and China want it) and the destruction of Syria, so that energy will take the Nabucco way to Europe, passing through Azerbaijan and Turkey (the NATO way).
It implies overthrowing the government of Iran, while Turkey throws its tentacles towards the Gulf and renews its Ottoman empire, while pipelines, coming from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, will push through Syria to the Mediterranean, after overthrowing the actual government.
This would remind Russia of the dangers of its old Ottoman nemesis, while China would feel threatened in its energy supplying, at the mercy of NATO’s allies.
Europe and Israel will definitely feel threatened by the New Ottoman Islamist coalition going from Turkey to the Gulf and from Gaza to Morocco, while Russia and China will find themselves threatened by the New Ottoman Islamic Turkey in Central Asia and the Caucasus.
So an attack on Iran is the best formula to start a third world war, which means a nuclear war and a possible end of life on earth.

Roger Akl

8600, SW, 87 Avenue, Miami, FL33173, USA

Actually in Paris: (331) 43 40 53 66

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

1 × four =